Skip to main content

About your Search

20130101
20130131
STATION
SFGTV 53
SFGTV2 7
LANGUAGE
English 61
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 61 (some duplicates have been removed)
, mr. rifkin, for the recommendation. and i want to thank the board for this award. i am truly honored and i want to thank mr. harris for the nomination. so, thank you very much. >> thank you. (applause) >> congratulations. and next, moving on to the transit division, we have two teams of employees that we're going to recognize from our maintenance of way section. these are the folks who maintain the entire system aside from the vehicles, everything that the vehicles run and rely on, the buildings, the tracks, all of that. i want to ask mr. haley to come up with mr. young lalague. young is a track maintenance supervisor and terry manages the entire maintenance of way division and is here on behalf of the signal crew. both of these gentlemen have been with the agency for 13 years. and we're really recognizing them for two specific projects, one of which director heinicke is well familiar with, the eureka curve track replacement project which was replacing the track that you heard updates on often at the director's request over the course of the project. very significant in terms of the
. (applause) >> i'd also like to thank the board and mr. rifkin and mr. haley for giving me the opportunity to lead young and also the maintenance crew. again, to reiterate what young said, it's the guys, the boots on the ground that really carry this through, that when everyone else is sleeping, they're the ones out fixing the problems and getting the project done. so, i appreciate all of them, all your crew and all of the signal maintenance crew. >> thank you for outstanding work on these two vital projects. director heinicke. >> sure. i will say a special thank you. this has been as you know, terry and young, it's nice to see you. something of particular interest to me. and i think it would be remiss if i didn't note particular interest to director beach who i suspect is smiling for a brief moment and then will continue yelling at you guys. [laughter] >> so, on that note i will say this is a very tangible and significant thing. the speed and the curve is significant. when you multiply the number of people that go through the curve, by the time lost because of that track wear, you're talk
my report. >> thank you, director rifkin. i want to say on the 28th i hope as many members of the board will be able to join and go in the various divisions. we see it in a monthly basis for those we honor. where can you see it on a daily basis? i think it's pretty much everybody almost every day. i encourage everyone to go in the celebration. okay, anybody else on this particular item? >> i want to add my personal thank you for the left turn pocket on valencia. i read it for the first time last night. it's lovely. i've been terrified of streetcar tracks, so, that made such a nice comfort easy way, welcomed as a cyclist and making that term and the fame mr. yee for the bike path, it's a lot of significance for a lot of people. it has gotten the most out p.e. to me from cyclists i see, any which, public meetings. people saying thank you so much for improvements. * outreach i was on oak street and saw a team of of your staff examining down there during rush hour to figure out how to facilitate the bike lanes. dedicated, they were there at 6:30 in the eaglev. thank you. well
i say mr. rifkin pointed out that 2020 for the feeder agreement, the contract expense of that, this one would extend only to 2014 because we're trying to maximize our ability to negotiate after the bart board's fare policy increase. and this allows us to negotiate to our own interests for the mta and the city by having this contract only go to 2014? >> well, i think the idea behind going to 2014 was we wanted to wait and see what the bart board fare policy would be. my understanding from bart's staff, conversation, is they are proposing a fare policy that's similar to what or consistent with what's currently there today. so, that was the idea behind having it expire in 2014. >> so, what would happen if we equalized both contracts to 2014 or 2020, what's in our best interest as the mta or the city? >> certainly that's possible to equalize the contracts there. i'm not going to opine on whether -- what's best for the city or not. i think maybe that's a more appropriate question for mr. rifkin on that. but certainly it's useful. >> well, right now doing it to 2014 so we can have b
, but on zombie the head of transportation city and county of san francisco, ed rifkin who has been instrumental, not only in this effort, but in so many efforts to improve public transit here in the city and county. our path to this historic day has been a long one as you know. over the past three years we have heard from low-income and middle income families across san francisco. but the drive ambition of our youth and parents and community is ultimately what got us to this point. and i am especially grateful to six organizations that have helped raise the funding power. chinatown community center, the san francisco youth commission, urban habitat, the student advisory council, and jamestown community center. i also want to thank so many folks throughout the city who have, you know, taken the time to pitch this, this program. and just to close, my colleagues on the board of supervisors, supervisors avalos, chu, kim, mar, our mayor has been supportive of this. it is a very historic time and i want to thank you for the opportunity. and if i may, i know that we have one member of this coalition w
, members of the board of directors and director of transportation rifkin. i'm legislative aid for board of supervisors president and district 3 supervisor david chiu. and i'm going to keep my comments relatively brief. you've already covered quite a bit of ground. we want you to hear from our neighbors and businesses in district 3 and the north beach in particular. we have come a long way since may and i want to very much appreciate director rifkin's acknowledgment of the surprise that both our community felt and that our office felt when the full scope of the construction impacts, both utility work and the excavation on columbus became known to us in may. we knew that there was an approved extraction of north beach as part of the e-i-r. that's always been in the discussion, but we did not know either the lengthy timeline or the full extent of the closures required and what we feel would be an unacceptable impact on the businesses and residents of north beach. so, i do want to thank director rifkin for that acknowledgment. you'll see, and i think you'll hear today, we have a lot of trus
year. this is in essence the rifkin doctrine. eternal fiscal plunger and service reduction. the mta board has a responsibility to hold this in check. we are approximating the service standards of emelio cruz of 15 plus years ago. viva emelio. i must add in closing if you are going to put through the standard for the fast past rate for senior citizens, mr. rifkin bet r be willing to pay $100 a month for his fast pass. [speaker not understood] equality for everyone. >> next speaker, please. >> barry toronto followed by mark gruberg. is mr. gruberg here? okay, all right. >> mr. toronto. >>> yes, good afternoon again. i first want to alert you that i saw on facebook somebody shared a link of an article in the new york times about the international association of taxi regulators was working on creating regulations to deal with those apps, [speaker not understood] and side cart. our own chris hiyashi has been instrumental in being involved in helping create those regulations. i think i'm a little disturbed that this information is not getting out to you guys and to us about what you guys
to [speaker not understood] rifkin ha termed the last report ultimate [speaker not understood], that is really an issue. because i think in the community meeting that we have, that is two options that everybody opposed or overwhelmingly opposed. i think, of course, this is the ultimate default and i -- hopefully that won't happen. lastly, i'd like to request for consideration of this artificial deadline of february 4th. i understand time and cost and a lot of things involved in making this very important decision. but the community dialogue, the community planning process has just started. i know the project has been kind of going on for 20-year, but the north beach process started half a year. we barely started and i'm getting into it. i think we have a deadline of february 1st to make this kind of decisions. i think i'm very troubled by it. i'd like to request that the resolution be amended to reflect a date that gives more time for the community to be involved. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> [speaker not understood] smith, eric scott, julie christian son. >> good afternoon, mr. [
to transportation, you have to do both. and as director rifkin said, this funding proposal allows you to not only fund this pilot program, which is why -- one of the reasons that the mtc gave you this funding, but also allows you to meet the maintenance need that all of us should be addressed. you know, you don't have to choose between helping low-income youth and actually making the system work. i do believe that that is a false choice, and i think that we can walk and chiu gum at the same time. i think that it is in the interest of these youth that we have a system that works. but a system that works will not be meeting the needs of low-income families if families cannot afford to use that system. and, so, that's why we're here. i believe that this has been fully vetted by the mtc with a vote, by the way, was unanimous and everyone expected that san francisco would turn around and do exactly what you're about to do today, which is to fund this program with this money. >> a very eloquent explanation, and i appreciate it. i continue to have my concerns about the trade-offs, which i don't think ar
. colleagues, any questions or further comments? okay. mr. rifkin, thank you. thanks very much. at this time i'd like to open up to public comment if there are any members -- i'm sorry about that. before public comment, mr. rose. legislative analyst report. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee, i would point out on page 5 of our report that the, that the proposed feeder agreement wherein part is paying the sfmta, mr. chairman, that is a totaly voluntary agreement so that bart does not have to enter into the agreement the feeder agreement or where the sfmta is getting a payment. it's totally voluntary. * that is in contrast to the fast pass agreement. on page 7 of our report regarding the -- regarding that feeder agreement as shown in table 1 on page 7 of our report, that without the 5% annual cap on the payment increases, the payments would increase approximately 6 percent annually, and would result in a total of $33.3 million in payments in bart through sfmta. that is an increase of about 1.2 million in payments over the term of the proposed feeder agreement with the 5% cap in place.
afternoon. >>> good afternoon, director rifkin and fellow board members. i'm currently the president of russian hill neighbors, and we represent over 600 households and merchants. and at our recent meeting that ended at 9 o'clock last night, our board of directors with 30 people -- we have a very large board of directors -- unanimously voted to support option 4 at the pagoda theater. it is rare that 30 people agree, especially the 30 people with whom i'm involved. i come from a family of 45. rarely -- we have collaboration, rarely consensus. so, i've been involved with -- i've been with north beach library, so, different opinions. i respect and everyone's opinion that has come before me today, but this just happens to be what we looked at it very thoroughly as we have. it's a 30-year old organization and we've tried to take in every side of it. and like i said, we unanimously support option 4 at this time. things could change, but today december 4th [inaudible]. thank you. >> thank you. >> graziano [speaker not understood]. >>> my name is graziano mukasey and i run a small business i
of the lies. i can't believe option 2 was not the favored choice. director rifkin, you were there, i'm sure you remember this rather clearly. we were not notified about this meeting and that these options were going to be presented to you until november 30th. i understand not everybody was notified by mr. funge if these options were going to be put before you. but anyway, i was. and then i've been back and forth with him three or four times about why option 2 didn't appear on the agenda. and the last thing i heard from him was, he thanked me this was the first. thank you for your comments regarding option 2. we'll be presenting all options to our board of -- on december the first. i don't see option 2 anyplace in your agenda. the decision on which option to move forward is now with our board. i was at the meeting all three hours of it and option 2 was clearly the majority vote. it says $20 million. nobody seems to be interested in that. pagoda palace is indeed an eyesore, but it seems to be if you go for it, or vote that it can be studied further, it's just going to continue the plan that t
that we fully support the comments from mr. rifkin and mr. lee. and i appreciate mr. rose's summarization there. so, we do agree to the amendments that have been proposed. and thank you also for the clarification. the feeder agreement, as it is set up, is not only tied to increases or decreases in inflation, but also rider ship. so, it's not just adjusting by inflation, but also by the number of riders connecting from muni to bart. and then going back to the fast pass agreement, before our time, the fast pass was initially accepted on bart in 1983 to help alleviate capacity problems that sfmta was incurring along the market and mission corridor. so, bart provides a valuable service to the riders of san francisco and to sfmta in providing a direct service along mission and along market bringing passengers from balboa park all the way up to as far as embarcadaro. this is the fast pass was not available to be used on bart. sfmta would no doubt incur additional expenses to carry those riders on their buses. so, we are providing a service. sfmta does set the price of the fast pass. not only th
morning. thank you all for coming out today. we're very happy to be here. my name is ed rifkin, i'm the other ed, director of transportation. and as the transportation director, i oversee the sfmta which is the agency that is charged with implementing the city's transit first policy. and what our goal, what the city's goal and the transit first policy is is to make sure that everybody can get around san francisco, that everyone can get to where they need to go. it is an important part of making the economy of san francisco work, to making the quality of life good and better. but it's not just get around san francisco any old way. this is san francisco, and we have values that we bring to our transportation system. we want people to get around in a way that steps lightly on the environment. we want people to get around in ways that are enjoyable. and that really contribute to what makes san francisco special, such as our wonderful cable cars. but above all, we want to make sure that people can get around the city safely. it's no good to have a great transportation system if people
not understood] to director rifkin, and really want to make the point, i'll read briefly from the letter, we are actually very excited that this process has begun to come a long way, but we're very concerned with today, you've heard from others, is that the deeds make the words. we're much more concerned with reality in neighborhoods in north beach than we are with rhetoric. and the rhetoric is good. our letter reads, we are please today see your comments, director reiskin in the chronicle yesterday stating that the mta is now "ready to abandon the plan to dig up columbus for the unnecessary and disruptive central subway destruction that damaged north beach. muni also no longer favors digging up the street. this is very welcome news. the letter goes on to say and you heard today, that's not what your plan is to vote on today. you're planning to vote on a resolution that unless you delete the language states that if the director of transportation by february 1st determines that option 3 or 4 is not feasible, et cetera, the muni board of directors directs the central subway program to continue
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 61 (some duplicates have been removed)